• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

LeMond's Pre-TDF prediction: LA will not start or pull out!

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Nov 17, 2009
2,388
0
0
Visit site
CycloErgoSum said:
Lance's continued presence is what's bad for the sport and bringing it into disrepute. Do you blame the police for arresting criminals and ruining their careers? Is it all a spiteful setup to you?

When it comes to drugs in sports... I acutally am of the opinion that less regulation is better.

This isn't so much a moral or ethical stance... but rather just an observation of how different sports handle doping here in the US.

Baseball is widely viewed as the biggest "doper" sport of the "big 3" sports in the US (baseball, football, basketball). But in reality... it's probably the least doped up of the three. Basketball does almost no testing, and football does, but makes no apologies for their doping. But baseball is trying to fight it. The actual act of fighting it makes the sport seem MORE doped then it really is... it's kind of a catch-22. Bringing it to light hasn't helped things... if anything it's damaged things.

What this tells me is that the fans really prefer to be in the dark. They want to believe that Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds had their skulls expand naturally instead of HGH. They want to believe football players really are capable of taking the beating they do each week and recovering completely without doping. They are okay with being lied to.

But once the light gets shined on the cheating... they want it to stop. And the sad fact is... that's impossible. To the common fan... a Tour de France with no positive tests is "cleaner" then one with thirty... even though the only difference is that they actually CAUGHT 30 of the cheaters instead of letting them all get away with it.

This isn't like crime where the crime gets reported regardless, so you can judge enforcement by how many of the criminals are caught, or how big a decrease in reports you see from year to year. We only know about it when someone is caught... so the actual act of CATCHING a cheater harms the image of the sport.

It's an odd dynamic that makes it very hard for those running these sports to know how to act. Do you act in the financial interests of your sport... and cover things up so they look clean... or the "ethical" interests of your sport... catching cheaters but making the sport look like there's a ton of people cheating and driving fans away.

I don't care what happens to Lance at the end of all this. But I do hope cycling still survives at a decent level in the US when it's all done. In the end, I think that will be hard until cycling "declares itself clean" (whether they are or not), declare the past as being past and not go back to test anymore, and only punish positives found with a current test.

When you have the constant questioning of past results, it's not easy to build a fan following. You need to arrive at a place like American football is at... players get tested and suspended for PED use... but nobody really cares that much, and nobody speculates about what earlier players might have been on to get their results.

I think the most successful sports are operated in this matter. Getting tough on doping seems to hurt success, not help it.

All that being said... since cycling is obviously NOT going that route... they might as well get as many people as they can. I just don't think that's really what the fans want, regardless of what they say. They'd rather be ignorant.
 
red_flanders said:
What you say is true, it must be very difficult to stay above the fray for Lemond, as it would for anyone. I just wish he had in this case.

If Armstrong goes down, as it appears he will, kicking him only hurts Lemond. I don't blame him for his reaction, I just wish he could step above it in this case.

Agree on all your points. He is the reason I started following cycling. Lemond's further comments only solidify the perception that Armstrong is trying to portray him as bitter and jealous.
 
python said:
i strongly disagree with you.

you have not been privy to all the things between texas and greg. you have no idea nor have you been on the receiving end of having your livelihood threatened via multiple persons manipulation and direct personal threats.

greg only said what he believes is based on the reasonable sources. if it sounds vindictive, there is a very good reason for that.

finally. +1. yes! it needs to be repeated over and over. there is nothing wrong with how lemond has acted nor with anything he has said during what must have been some terrible years for him and his family.

when people plead for him to say things "differently" or "not to mention armstrong ever" they always fail to realize that things are not equal here. it's not like we are dealing with two petulent stars who are simply at each other's throats due to their egos.

one of them (lemond) has been horribly wronged by the other (armstrong).
 
May 13, 2009
3,093
3
0
Visit site
Roland Rat said:
I really don't get why they do it. The opinions of people on this forum don't mean anything in the scheme of things, don't know why PS are bothered.

Actually, I've seen quite a few cyclingnews articles seen referenced by newspapers and other news outlets. It's pretty big in the small world of cycling. And the forum is probably the most active cycling forum at the moment.

If you think about how those guys micromanage their twitter etc. I wouldn't put it beyond them to have shills spamming this thread.
 
Jun 22, 2009
23
0
0
Visit site
the art of peaking

I'd find it far more interesting to read an article on this from Lance than from Lemond.

In any case as a cycling enthusiast I found no useful information in this article, and will enjoy reading the blog posts from the fat bitter has-been and watching all the passport cheats battle it out.
 
May 25, 2009
332
0
0
Visit site
++1 as well.

I attended a charity function w/ LeMond this past winter and it was scary the depth at which Armstrong attempted to destroy not only LeMond's business interests but everything connected to him... his family etc...

F__ed up.
 
Sep 25, 2009
7,527
1
0
Visit site
red_flanders said:
What you say is true, it must be very difficult to stay above the fray for Lemond, as it would for anyone. I just wish he had in this case.

If Armstrong goes down, as it appears he will, kicking him only hurts Lemond. I don't blame him for his reaction, I just wish he could step above it in this case.
i never considered professional bikers to be reminiscent of those refined high society floaters with butterfly ties.

they are hard, competitive chaps withe egos to boot.

if you won a gt you must have a self esteem/ego commensurate with your achievements.

if you cross that ego you are likely to receive back in proportion.

depending on where your stars located, you may have been a dealer of the punishment.

obviously texas stars have gone dim and he's receiving what he dealt to others at the height of his influence.

really simple - time for a payback and he has only himself to blame for his outstanding arrogance,
 

ElDiablo

BANNED
Jun 28, 2010
6
0
0
Visit site
MacRoadie said:
Nice. Start off with a mild, general qualifier smelling like an anti-Lance post, then finish up with a strong LeMond slam.

Alaways one of the better pages in the Fanboy playbook.

Yeah, Lemond was a great guy. Don't you remember the snide little insults he directed at my alter-ego, the real El Diablo during the 90 tour? I really enjoyed when El Diablo kicked his *** and dropped him like a bad habit during the tours of 91 and 92.

I always wonder what was in Otto's bag of tricks, especially how Lemond's performance shot up between the Giro and Tour of 89.

I think Greg's long top tube, stretched out riding style caused some serious brain damage.
 
ElDiablo said:
Yeah, Lemond was a great guy. Don't you remember the snide little insults he directed at my alter-ego, the real El Diablo during the 90 tour? I really enjoyed when El Diablo kicked his *** and dropped him like a bad habit during the tours of 91 and 92.

I always wonder what was in Otto's bag of tricks, especially how Lemond's performance shot up between the Giro and Tour of 89.

I think Greg's long top tube, stretched out riding style caused some serious brain damage.

Aw man, no PM this time? Don't love me anymore baby?
 
Roland Rat said:
I really don't get why they do it. The opinions of people on this forum don't mean anything in the scheme of things, don't know why PS are bothered.

and i believe it has actually been reported that armstrong did hire PS and that PS did have people posting on forums to flood boards with anti-lemond stuff so that armstrong could win the PR war...which if you remember he did. it worked. it is only recently that cycling boards have begun to switch their allegiance.
 

Barrus

BANNED
Apr 28, 2010
3,480
0
0
Visit site
american psycho said:
I'd find it far more interesting to read an article on this from Lance than from Lemond.

In any case as a cycling enthusiast I found no useful information in this article, and will enjoy reading the blog posts from the fat bitter has-been and watching all the passport cheats battle it out.

Yes, I too would like to read as to how LA peaks, how his program really looks like, however I think you and I have completely different views of what might be the program. I would really like to see LA's doping program, what he used when and how much and how to beat the tests, but I think this will never come out
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
kurtinsc said:
When it comes to drugs in sports... I acutally am of the opinion that less regulation is better.

........ I just don't think that's really what the fans want, regardless of what they say. They'd rather be ignorant.

A lot of cyclists have died because of pressure to dope for success. How do the fans deal with that. How do you tell someone's family that your son's death was kept hush hush for the good of the fans....too many young athletes have died because of guys like armstrong and bruyneel pressurising them to achieve success and convincing them that the only road is through PEDs.

No it needs much stricter regulations across all sports. to hell with the finance and big bucks of the sport, people's health is more important than.

the blackest joke about uniballer is his so called crusade against this terrible disease yet people are dying from epo. Kirchen ring any bells lately...
 
Barrus said:
Yes, I too would like to read as to how LA peaks, how his program really looks like, however I think you and I have completely different views of what might be the program. I would really like to see LA's doping program, what he used when and how much and how to beat the tests, but I think this will never come out

It might. If LA is the bundle of anger and resentment I think he is, then I still expect him to try to bring the whole thing down if/when he's in a corner. Right from Carmichael injecting him up the *** to his cancer to the program, everyone on the team and how the UCI were complicit. The whole lot. The only thing that might stop it is if the Hog came out relatively unscathed, but if the Hog goes down too and they have nothing to lose, I expect that he will start squealing like the cowardly vermin he really is.
 
Oct 29, 2009
433
0
0
Visit site
kurtinsc said:
When it comes to drugs in sports... I acutally am of the opinion that less regulation is better.

This isn't so much a moral or ethical stance... but rather just an observation of how different sports handle doping here in the US.

Baseball is widely viewed as the biggest "doper" sport of the "big 3" sports in the US (baseball, football, basketball). But in reality... it's probably the least doped up of the three. Basketball does almost no testing, and football does, but makes no apologies for their doping. But baseball is trying to fight it. The actual act of fighting it makes the sport seem MORE doped then it really is... it's kind of a catch-22. Bringing it to light hasn't helped things... if anything it's damaged things.

What this tells me is that the fans really prefer to be in the dark. They want to believe that Sammy Sosa and Barry Bonds had their skulls expand naturally instead of HGH. They want to believe football players really are capable of taking the beating they do each week and recovering completely without doping. They are okay with being lied to.

But once the light gets shined on the cheating... they want it to stop. And the sad fact is... that's impossible. To the common fan... a Tour de France with no positive tests is "cleaner" then one with thirty... even though the only difference is that they actually CAUGHT 30 of the cheaters instead of letting them all get away with it.

This isn't like crime where the crime gets reported regardless, so you can judge enforcement by how many of the criminals are caught, or how big a decrease in reports you see from year to year. We only know about it when someone is caught... so the actual act of CATCHING a cheater harms the image of the sport.

It's an odd dynamic that makes it very hard for those running these sports to know how to act. Do you act in the financial interests of your sport... and cover things up so they look clean... or the "ethical" interests of your sport... catching cheaters but making the sport look like there's a ton of people cheating and driving fans away.

I don't care what happens to Lance at the end of all this. But I do hope cycling still survives at a decent level in the US when it's all done. In the end, I think that will be hard until cycling "declares itself clean" (whether they are or not), declare the past as being past and not go back to test anymore, and only punish positives found with a current test.

When you have the constant questioning of past results, it's not easy to build a fan following. You need to arrive at a place like American football is at... players get tested and suspended for PED use... but nobody really cares that much, and nobody speculates about what earlier players might have been on to get their results.

I think the most successful sports are operated in this matter. Getting tough on doping seems to hurt success, not help it.

All that being said... since cycling is obviously NOT going that route... they might as well get as many people as they can. I just don't think that's really what the fans want, regardless of what they say. They'd rather be ignorant.

For someone's who's 'never tested positive' Texarse has done his bit to bring down a sport with the smoke from his fires.

I disagree cycling fans are happy to have their heads in the sand; it's not mere entertainment and bigger, stronger, faster doesn't mean better in cycling.

Cycling won't die - it's too beautiful and stronger than the personalities that presently represent and administer it.

Science has been both cycling's enemy and friend, and the way forward is a vigorous testing regime with real and innovative penalties.

A change of culture is needed too - to do this, the omerta must be broken.
 
Apr 28, 2009
58
0
0
Visit site
Can someone explain to me why if you're critical of LeMond then you're a shill working for Armstrong? People do have varying opinions here otherwise it wouldn't be nearly so interesting.
 
May 13, 2009
3,093
3
0
Visit site
Roland Rat said:
It might. If LA is the bundle of anger and resentment I think he is, then I still expect him to try to bring the whole thing down if/when he's in a corner. Right from Carmichael injecting him up the *** to his cancer to the program, everyone on the team and how the UCI were complicit. The whole lot. The only thing that might stop it is if the Hog came out relatively unscathed, but if the Hog goes down too and they have nothing to lose, I expect that he will start squealing like the cowardly vermin he really is.

Who would LA and the hog bring down? Bottle? Big George? Kloden? Big yawn.

The only interesting revelation could come from the Astana year. But I doubt that he and Bertie shared notes.
 

flicker

BANNED
Aug 17, 2009
4,153
0
0
Visit site
Please Bennoti69. Please show respect for Kim Kirchen and his family.

Now I do not like Greg but I think he is an honest guy when it comes to his allegations. I do not like his presentations on this subject. Wherever he and Floyd go the leave a path of negativity and destruction.

Greg needs to look at this. I hope and pray Greg and Floyd work with whomever they need to for their agenda. Please keep it out of the public eye, let the authorities do their job. Those two cause nothing but negative image on cycling.
 

Barrus

BANNED
Apr 28, 2010
3,480
0
0
Visit site
Roland Rat said:
It might. If LA is the bundle of anger and resentment I think he is, then I still expect him to try to bring the whole thing down if/when he's in a corner. Right from Carmichael injecting him up the *** to his cancer to the program, everyone on the team and how the UCI were complicit. The whole lot. The only thing that might stop it is if the Hog came out relatively unscathed, but if the Hog goes down too and they have nothing to lose, I expect that he will start squealing like the cowardly vermin he really is.

Oh I hope so, it might burn down cycling to the ground, or at least ensure that it becomes an even smaller sport in certain countries, but perhaps a bit cleaner sport
 
ElDiablo said:
Yeah, Lemond was a great guy. Don't you remember the snide little insults he directed at my alter-ego, the real El Diablo during the 90 tour? I really enjoyed when El Diablo kicked his *** and dropped him like a bad habit during the tours of 91 and 92.

I always wonder what was in Otto's bag of tricks, especially how Lemond's performance shot up between the Giro and Tour of 89.

I think Greg's long top tube, stretched out riding style caused some serious brain damage.

You mean cappuccino? GL didn't know it at the time but Cappuccino was on something a little stronger than caffeine. I thought that GL was a little rude in the one sound bite that I heard directed at cappuccino during the 1990 Tour, but I would forget his name as well. Where the hell did that guy come from? A domestique transformed into a podium finisher? Who would have thought it was possible? ;) Cappuccino was at the cutting edge my friend.

Oh yeah, and welcome back to the forum.
 
Jul 22, 2009
3,355
1
0
Visit site
buckwheat said:
Yup, I was thinking of this the other day. It will be proof positive that he's doping because his numbers will be normal after getting 6 or 7 pints taken.

"Uh. Would you mind spinning that and giving it back to me when you're done."
 
Nov 17, 2009
2,388
0
0
Visit site
Benotti69 said:
A lot of cyclists have died because of pressure to dope for success. How do the fans deal with that. How do you tell someone's family that your son's death was kept hush hush for the good of the fans....too many young athletes have died because of guys like armstrong and bruyneel pressurising them to achieve success and convincing them that the only road is through PEDs.

No it needs much stricter regulations across all sports. to hell with the finance and big bucks of the sport, people's health is more important than.

the blackest joke about uniballer is his so called crusade against this terrible disease yet people are dying from epo. Kirchen ring any bells lately...

Hey, I believe in the legalization of all recreational drugs too.

You are responsible for what you put in your own body. You want to kill yourself... go ahead. I just want to watch guys race bikes.

I do find it amusing that you seem to place the blame on Lance for this. If your view is to be taken at face value, he was "pressured to dope" the same as any other doper. Why not on Indurain (who everyone felt the pressure to dope to catch up to)? Why not Merckx? Why not Fausto Coppi? They all doped too.

The difference is that in the day of Merckx and Coppi, they tested positive (or in Coppi's case, weren't tested at all but admitted to taking drugs), missed some time, came back and nobody cared. They're looked at as heroes and legends... not because of their actions but because the sport didn't make an effort to point out to the public how much cheating was going on.
 
Cobblestones said:
Who would LA and the hog bring down? Bottle? Big George? Kloden? Big yawn.

The only interesting revelation could come from the Astana year. But I doubt that he and Bertie shared notes.

I was thinking more US cycling and the UCI. I truly believe that LA hates professional cycling and blames it for his cancer. I reckon he probably believes he has paid a lot for the sport and it owed him, and if he is going to pay again he might try to damage it as much as he possibly can.

Like the kid who takes his ball home so no-one else can play.
 
crispy said:
Can someone explain to me why if you're critical of LeMond then you're a shill working for Armstrong? People do have varying opinions here otherwise it wouldn't be nearly so interesting.

Because Lemond:

Isn't the subject of a federal investigation
Never tested positive for EPO
Never tested positive for anything, for that matter
Hasn't been accused of doping by a former team mate
Has never been accused by ANYONE in the sport, of doping, either during his career, or in the ensuing two decades.
Never tried passing off a back-dated TUE
Has never been accusued of, or admitted to using the "services" of a well-known doping doctor
Never had one single shred of evidence, rumor, or innuendo directed towards him regarding doping...
 
Jul 22, 2009
3,355
1
0
Visit site
crispy said:
Can someone explain to me why if you're critical of LeMond then you're a shill working for Armstrong? People do have varying opinions here otherwise it wouldn't be nearly so interesting.

It's plenty interesting for those running the show.